Arrogant, maybe...
Ignorant on something I claim major knowledge on, rarely if ever.Originally Posted by Faroe
Re my nutrition knowledge, I've actually published two papers in scientific journals on yeast nutrition (which has a lot in common with humans). I worked at Cargill and General Mills in biotech research (fermentation and emulsifiers, both for food products). I set up, organized, operated, and managed two testing laboratories for fuel ethanol plants that ran on waste human food products. I raised exotic finches, whose nutritional issues due to small size/high metabolic rate in multiple respects are actually harder than for humans or larger mundane domesticated birds such as chickens. I'm most of the way through writing a book on long-distance hiking (having hiked over 3500 miles in the past 6 years), with nutrition being a large part of what it covers (and proper nutrition is much harder to do well on the trail than at home).
I've read Francis Lappe's book 70s-era (DFASP) that contains the famous graphs of essential amino acid profiles and complementation in foods, and can talk about them intelligently. I've been able to draw amino acids from memory when back in Organic Chemistry as a pre-med.
Here is a link to the article I wrote on food preps as a public service for Y2K preparation for the website I owned pre-rollover:
http://tinyurl.com/88jlz3f .
I expect this will establish credentials to your satisfaction.
The point remains: food preps should be concentrated in food value, relative to space and weight as well as cost. That most definitely includes minimizing water content insofar as possible. This is why for example dried products such as beans and grains (wheat, rice, etc.) are so efficient WRT food storage. Preppers commonly obtain large quantities powdered milk in preference to canned milk for this same reason (as well as cost).
Oh, and Davis? I believe she said that if a person ate right, they need never die. She then proceeded to get cancer and die.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adelle_Davis
"...Davis received significant and strong criticism from fellow nutritionists, with one review commenting that her works were "at best a half truth."[3] While lauded for her ability to open the public to the concept of science in nutrition, she was nevertheless heavily criticized for misusing the science in her nutritional works to come to "ridiculous conclusions," especially in light of her scientific training. Amongst the many views not supported by nutritionists include her view that not only physical health but mental and social ills could be cured with the proper diet, stating alcoholism, crime, suicide and divorce were the product of mere poor diet.[2] Although she was very popular with the public in general in the 1970s, none of her books were recommended by any significant nutritional professional society of the time. Independent review of the superficially impressive large number of citations to the scientific literature in her books found that the citations often either misquoted the scientific literature or was contradicted by or unsupported by the proposed citation, and that errors in the book averaged at least one per page.[5] One review noted that only 30 of 170 citations in a sample taken from one chapter accurately supported the assertions in her book.[2] Additionally, the 1969 White House Conference on Food, Nutrition, and Health labelled her probably the single most harmful source of false nutritional information.[1]
Most concerning to physicians and nutritionists who reviewed her work was not only the scientific inaccuracies, but the dangerous, and "potentially lethal," recommendations that appeared in her books."
Reply With Quote